I assume, after inspecting the elements of these icons, that these are of St. Isidore? If so, thank you so much.

]The one on the left is of St Isidore, and I would not recommend it. The face is too cartoonish, and what is that on his head? Bishops who came from noble families are shown bare-headed, or, in post-15th century saints, wearing bishops' mitres. They should not wear crowns of nobility.

The one on the right is St Photios the Great. I have other examples on file which are of better quality (i.e. not a scan of a damaged print).

There's also this illumination of Sts Braulio and Isidor from the Isidori libri originum, second half of the 10th century:

Or St. Isidor alone:

Icons should express something of why the saint is so regarded. Was the writing of his Etymologiae the reason he is regarded as a saint, or his fidelity to the faith and its correct proclamation through his life as a bishop? This distinction is important.

Icons should express something of why the saint is so regarded. Was the writing of his Etymologiae the reason he is regarded as a saint, or his fidelity to the faith and its correct proclamation through his life as a bishop? This distinction is important.

Well, together with St. Braulio and St. Leandrus, his brother, he is considered one of the pillars of the old Spanish Church. He defeated Arianism and enlightened the barbarian Visigoths. IIRC he also presided over some of the Councils of Toledo.

I assume he's depicted as a writer in that particular illumination (not necessarily an icon), because he was the author of the book it comes from.

Icons should express something of why the saint is so regarded. Was the writing of his Etymologiae the reason he is regarded as a saint, or his fidelity to the faith and its correct proclamation through his life as a bishop? This distinction is important.

Well, together with St. Braulio and St. Leandrus, his brother, he is one of the pillars of the old Spanish Church. He defeated Arianism and enlightened the barbarian Visigoths.

I assume he's depicted as a writer in that particular illumination (not necessarily an icon), because he was the author of the book it comes from.

Illuminations are not necessarily icons in the Orthodox sense, though many an icon has been painted as an illumination. These examples of St Isidore well illustrate that difference.

dcommini asked for an icon of St Isidore. The illuminations provided are not icons. As for St Leander, here is a good example of an icon of him, which is neither cartoonish, nor deficient:

Is the quote on the scroll really from St Leander's writings/preaching?

Whether he actually wrote that statement, I cannot say, but it is appropriate for someone who fought against the heresy of Arianism.

BTW, what is written on a saint's scroll need not be something he actually said or wrote. More often than not, it is a passage from scripture which says something about the saint's life, character, or conduct.

Is the quote on the scroll really from St Leander's writings/preaching?

Not literally, but it alludes to his homily In laudem Ecclesiae ob conversionem gentis (In praise of he Church for the conversion of the people), found among the acts of the 3rd Council of Toledo (see paragraph 3 on heresies being like thorns).

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

An event like this in the life of an Orthodox saint can be shown iconographically in a "life" icon, where the saint is shown in the central panel, surrounded by smaller scenes of events in his life.

Really?

I'm missing your point. Could you elaborate?

You saying that life events can be painted on side panels and the main icon is supposed to be a saint standing straight. These show otherwise.

You missed my point. Let me restate it:

The "icon" of Isidore the Farmer shows a scene where an angel is plowing his field, and Isidore is gesturing to it, as if the angel and his work is the means to salvation. What should have been done is for this scene to be shown in the proper manner of a "life" icon, as an illustration of a miraculous event in his life.

And yes, I am well aware of the "narrative" style of iconography, where different scenes are not set out in separate little panels surrounded by a central panel, but merged into a single composite image.

I know this doesn't count as an icon, technically, but I saw it posted in an icon thread for Mary, and I thought I'd share. Really unsettling. I think it's the eyes that do it for me :/

I find it is far from unsettling. It is the eyes that do it for me. I leave it for others to psychoanalyze me if I do not conform to their ideals.

Logged

If you cannot remember everything, instead of everything, I beg you, remember this without fail, that not to share our own wealth with the poor is theft from the poor and deprivation of their means of life; we do not possess our own wealth but theirs. If we have this attitude, we will certainly offer our money; and by nourishing Christ in poverty here and laying up great profit hereafter, we will be able to attain the good things which are to come. - St. John Chrysostom

I know this doesn't count as an icon, technically, but I saw it posted in an icon thread for Mary, and I thought I'd share. Really unsettling. I think it's the eyes that do it for me :/

You're right, it's creepy. Like she's about to cast a spell or something.

OTOH, there's this painting which is mercifully free of creepiness and sentimentality. It's also the only "Madonna and Child" painting I've come across which doesn't show Christ as a generic, helpless baby, but as a knowing, divine Child. The expression and bearing of the Virgin also alludes to her anticipation of the sorrow she will endure at her Son's future Passion.

OTOH, there's this painting which is mercifully free of creepiness and sentimentality. It's also the only "Madonna and Child" painting I've come across which doesn't show Christ as a generic, helpless baby, but as a knowing, divine Child. The expression and bearing of the Virgin also alludes to her anticipation of the sorrow she will endure at her Son's future Passion.

For some reason, it gives me the creeps. It strikes me as even creepier than the Rosa Mystica one.

OTOH, there's this painting which is mercifully free of creepiness and sentimentality. It's also the only "Madonna and Child" painting I've come across which doesn't show Christ as a generic, helpless baby, but as a knowing, divine Child. The expression and bearing of the Virgin also alludes to her anticipation of the sorrow she will endure at her Son's future Passion.

For some reason, it gives me the creeps. It strikes me as even creepier than the Rosa Mystica one.

On the other hand, I love it. It's my favourite Madonna ever, precisely because of the Child's knowing expression.

Logged

'Evil isn't the real threat to the world. Stupid is just as destructive as evil, maybe more so, and it's a hell of a lot more common. What we really need is a crusade against stupid. That might actually make a difference.'~Harry Dresden

OTOH, there's this painting which is mercifully free of creepiness and sentimentality. It's also the only "Madonna and Child" painting I've come across which doesn't show Christ as a generic, helpless baby, but as a knowing, divine Child. The expression and bearing of the Virgin also alludes to her anticipation of the sorrow she will endure at her Son's future Passion.

For some reason, it gives me the creeps. It strikes me as even creepier than the Rosa Mystica one.

On the other hand, I love it. It's my favourite Madonna ever, precisely because of the Child's knowing expression.

The graphic I have posted doesn't do justice to the painting. I've been lucky enough to see the original, and it is a powerful and sublime work.

The last one is some very terrible schlock. At least look at the podlinniki, if you want to properly imitate an icon. Unlike the Son, God the Father cannot be depicted because NO ONE has seen him. He may appear in 19th century Russian icons, but not in traditional Byzantine, or Russo-Byzantine iconography. If this is done in a quasi-traditional style, then it appears that whoever did it is badly informed. The Icon of Our Lady of Korea does not really look like an icon, aside from the style, because neither participant acts as in the usual icons.

Unlike the Son, God the Father cannot be depicted because NO ONE has seen him.

Quote

John 14

8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves.

The last one is some very terrible schlock. At least look at the podlinniki, if you want to properly imitate an icon. Unlike the Son, God the Father cannot be depicted because NO ONE has seen him. He may appear in 19th century Russian icons, but not in traditional Byzantine, or Russo-Byzantine iconography. If this is done in a quasi-traditional style, then it appears that whoever did it is badly informed. The Icon of Our Lady of Korea does not really look like an icon, aside from the style, because neither participant acts as in the usual icons.

Righteous Abraham, St. Alexander of Svir, Fr. Zachariah of St. Sergius Lavra were all visited by the Holy Trinity.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Is this shlock? I dont think there is a rule which forbids painting the founders of the church if they are still alive

There's a world of difference between ingratiating yourself by having yourself and your family painted into an icon (all of whom are alive), and showing two saints (Justinian the Great and Constantine the Great) supplicating before Christ.

If you can't tell the difference between deference and self-promotion ....